Series on Project Successes and Failures1

PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
Series on Project Successes and Failures1
Article 5 of 6
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
By Alan Stretton
INTRODUCTION
This is the fifth article in this series on project successes and failures. The first two
articles (Stretton 2014j, 2015a) looked at levels and criteria for project successes/
failures, at success/ failure rates, and at causes of project failures. It was concluded
that there was an evident need to establish and agree on success and failure criteria
for projects; to develop comprehensive success/failure data covering all significant
project management application areas; and a need to develop much more
comprehensive and validated data on causes of project failures.
The two most prominent cause-of-failure groups that emerged from the meagre
sampling in the second article were project-initiation-related causes, and project
management (PM) operational-related causes, which together made up 70% of all
causes of failure identified in the sampling. In view of their prominence, I thought
these deserved more detailed examination. This is being undertaken by linking them
with the three success levels for projects introduced in the first article.
The third article (Stretton 2015b) discussed links between both cause-of-failure
groups with Success Level 1: “Project management” success – colloquially
described as “doing the project right”. The fourth article (Stretton 2015c) was
concerned with Success Level 2: “Project” success – i.e. “doing the right project”,
and particularly with its strong linkage with project initiation-related causes of failure.
Project initiationrelated causes of
failure
PM operationalrelated causes of
failure
L3. ‘Business’
success
L2: “Project”
success
L1: “Project
management”
success
Figure 5-1: Links with Level 3:
“Business” success
Taking Cooke-Davies’ 2004 colloquial descriptor
of “business” success as “doing the right projects
right, time after time”, there are links between this
and both the primary cause-of-failure groups.
However, if the right projects are not done, the
relevance of “doing them right” diminishes. Both
linkages are shown in Figure 5-1 (which is a copy
of Figure 2-3 in the second article). However, the
most dominant link is with project initiation-related
causes of failure. This is linked back to the original
choices of projects, particularly in a strategic
management context, and what might be done to
consistently improve the “right” choice of projects.
1
This series of articles on project successes and failures is by Alan Stretton, PhD (Hon), Life Fellow of AIPM
(Australia), a pioneer in the field of professional project management and one of the most widely recognized
voices in the practice of program and project management. Long retired, Alan is still accepting some of the most
challenging research and writing assignments; he is a frequent contributor to the PM World Journal. His author
profile can be found at the end of the article.
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 1 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
LEVEL 3: “BUSINESS” SUCCESS
The nature of Level 3: “Business” success
The first article in this series summarized Level 3 as follows.
Were the right projects being done right, time after time? (Cooke-Davies 2004)
Morris 2013 calls Level 3 the institutional context, which he says
….. is about influencing and managing, as far as one is able, the context within
which the project, and other projects and programs, occurs in order to enhance
their effectiveness.
Dalcher 2014 connects project success at Level 3 with business success as follows.
The outcome of the project contributes to business success through the satisfaction
of business objectives that have been realized. Success equates to maximization
of financial and business efficiency measures, such as sales, profits or ROI as well
as delivered value measures.
Level 3: “Business” success is closely linked with organizational strategies
Cooke-Davies 2004 connects Level 3 Success (which he calls “consistent project
success”) with both corporate strategy and business objectives via the following
factor which he nominates as contributing to success at this level:
Portfolio and project management processes that allow the enterprise to resource
fully a suite of projects that are thoughtfully and dynamically matched to the
corporate strategy and business objectives.
Archibald et al 2012 also link projects with corporate / organizational strategy. In
discussing “project” success and project initiation phases in the fourth article of this
series, one of the key components of the first Incubation/ Feasibility phase proposed
by them, and summarised in Figure 4-3 in Stretton 2015c, is

Verification that the project is aligned with the strategic plans and objectives of
the sponsoring organization
These contributions from the project management literature link projects to
“business” success via organizational strategic objectives and plans. We first look
further at the nature of organizational strategies.
DELIBERATE AND EMERGENT ORGANIZATIONAL STRATEGIES
Mintzberg & Waters 1985 were particularly concerned with “the variety of ways in
which strategies actually take shape”. They summarised their paper as follows:
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 2 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
Deliberate and emergent strategies may be conceived as two ends of a continuum
along which real-world strategies lie. This paper seeks to develop this notion, and
some basic issues related to strategic choice, by elaborating along this continuum
various types of strategies uncovered in research. These include strategies labelled
planned, entrepreneurial, ideological, umbrella, process, unconnected, consensus
and imposed.
The eight strategies developed by Mintzberg & Waters are described in more detail
in Table 1 below, which is an abbreviated version of the original.
Strategy
Major features
Planned
Strategies originate in formal plans
Precise intentions exist, formulated by central leadership, backed by formal controls
Strategies most deliberate
Entrepreneurial
Strategies originate in central vision
Intentions originate as personal unarticulated vision of single leader
Organization under personal control of leader
Strategies relatively deliberate but can emerge
Ideological
Strategies originate in shared beliefs
Intentions exist as collective vision of all actors
Organization often pro-active vis-a-vis the environment
Strategies rather deliberate
Umbrella
Strategies originate in constraints
Leadership defines strategic boundaries or targets
Strategies partly deliberate, partly emergent and deliberately emergent
Process
Strategies originate in process
Leadership controls process aspects of strategy
Strategies partly deliberate, partly emergent and deliberately emergent
Unconnected
Strategies originate in enclaves
Actors loosely coupled to rest of organization produce patterns in own actions
Strategies organizationally emergent whether or not deliberate for actors
Consensus
Strategies originate in consensus
Through mutual adjustment, actors converge on patterns that become pervasive
Strategies rather emergent
Imposed
Strategies originate in environment
Environment dictates patterns in actions
Strategies most emergent, although may be internalised and made deliberate
Table 1: Based on Mintzberg & Waters 1985 Table 1 – Summary description of types of
strategies
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 3 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
The Deliberate end of the strategic continuum starts with planned strategies, which
are “found in an environment that is, if not benign or controllable, then at least rather
predictable”. The other, Emergent, end of the continuum, concludes with imposed
strategies, which are associated with more dynamic environments.
Mintzberg & Waters also note that
….not a few deliberate strategies are simply emergent ones that have been
uncovered and subsequently formalized.
Indeed, it would appear that all emergent strategies eventually become formalized, in
the sense that they inevitably become part and parcel of the organization’s strategy.
This appear to be what Turner 1993:37 had in mind when he said that
All projects should therefore arise from a need to fulfill specific strategic objectives and
achieve competitive advantage.
A MODEL OF STRATEGIC FORMULATION AND PLANNING
A basic strategic formulation and planning flow-sheet
The following flow-sheet of organizational strategic planning and its implementation
by programs and projects comes from the project management literature. It is a
combination of materials from Van Den Broecke 2005, PMI 2006a, PMI 2006b,
Archibald 2009, and Archer & Ghasemzadeh 2004, 1999, all of which I discussed in
this journal in Stretton 2013k.
Environmental
analysis
Strategic
Vision/
Mission
Strategic
Formulation;
Mapping;
Establishing
Objectives
Develop
Strategic
Options
to achieve
Objectives
Evaluate.
Choose
Best
Strategic
Option
Develop
Strategic
Portfolio
Projects
Programs
Evaluate,
prioritise
/balance
Projects
Programs
Figure 5-2: A basic strategic formulation and planning flow-sheet
Relationships between organizational strategies and originating projects
Moving from strategy formulation through the strategic planning process, we come to
the development of strategic portfolios of projects (and/or programs of projects) to
help implement strategies. As these derive from a mixture of ‘deliberate and
‘emergent’ strategy formulations, the projects in the portfolio will similarly be a mix of
what could be called ‘deliberate’ and ‘emergent’ projects. The latter include
“imposed” projects such as emergency projects, politically-originated projects, etc.
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 4 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
Therefore, as previously noted, if we adopt Mintzberg & Waters’ perspective, it would
appear that all projects can be seen as originating from strategy formulation.
Progressive elaboration within strategic formulation and planning processes
In recent contributions to this journal, both Usher 2013 and I (Stretton 2013l) have
observed that both organizational strategies and projects involve progressive
elaboration from a relatively broad beginning, through increasingly detailed
development, to detailed plans for implementation, as illustrated in Figure 5-3.
Progressive elaboration of strategic objectives
into programs and projects to achieve these objectives
Environmental
analysis
Strategic
Vision/
Mission
Strategic
Formulation;
Mapping;
Establishing
Objectives
Develop
Strategic
Options
to achieve
Objectives
Evaluate.
Choose
Best
Strategic
Option
Develop
Strategic
Portfolio
of Programs
& Projects
Evaluate,
prioritise &
balance
Programs &
Projects
Figure 5-3: Adding progressive elaborations of strategic objectives to basic strategic flow-sheet
Essentially, Usher and I argue that project managers are experienced in progressive
elaboration processes, and that therefore there is a good case for having project
management involved early in the strategic management processes.
However, there are other reasons for having project management involved in the
strategic formulation and planning processes, as we will see in looking at the last two
items of the basic strategic flow-sheet.
DEVELOPING AND EVALUATING STRATEGIC PORTFOLIOS OF PROJECTS
These processes essentially originate individual projects, be they ‘deliberate’ or
‘emergent’. If not done properly, the chances are that one or more of these projects
will not be the right project(s) to help achieve the strategic objectives.
Further, a typical strategic portfolio may comprise many projects and programs – so,
it is all the more important to get strategic formulation and planning “right”, if the
“right” projects are to be originated. Who better to undertake these last two steps
than project managers?
These processes will now be linked to the first phase of project initiation developed
in the previous article, where the case was made for increasing project management
involvement in all project initiation phases. The case will then be made for extending
this involvement into the development and evaluation of the strategic portfolio of
projects, and thence into strategic formulation itself.
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 5 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
LINKING STRATEGIC PLANNING AND INDIVIDUAL PROJECT INITIATION
Linking the strategic flow-sheet with the generic project initiation flow-sheet
The following figure shows the strategic flow-sheet in the upper sector, with the three
phases involved in project initiation as developed in the previous article of this series
below (albeit in somewhat abbreviated form).
Environmental
analysis
Strategic
Vision/
Mission
Strategic
Formulation;
Mapping;
Establishing
Objectives
Develop
Strategic
Options
to achieve
Objectives
Evaluate.
Choose
Best
Strategic
Option
Develop
Strategic
Portfolio
Projects
Programs
Evaluate,
prioritise
/balance
Projects
Programs
These activities also
initiate the Incubation/
Feasibility Phase for
each individual project,
incl. initial determination
of needs, benefits,
requirements, & scope
Individual
Project
Starting
Phase
elaborating needs
etc
Individual
Project
Definition
/Planning
Phase
Figure 5-4: Linking the strategic flow-sheet with the generic project initiation flow-sheet
The linkage here is between the two strategic planning items of developing the
strategic portfolio, and evaluating, prioritizing and balancing the portfolio’s projects
(and/or programs) on the one hand, and the very first phase of individual project
initiation processes, namely the incubation/feasibility phase, on the other.
I have not seen this particular linkage developed previously, but it seems to me that
the rationale of it is rather straight-forward. The very acts of developing strategic
portfolios and evaluating, prioritizing and balancing the component projects are
originating processes for the component projects of the strategic portfolio.
However, as noted in the previous article, I am distinguishing between originating
projects, which in this case essentially comes from strategic formulation; and project
initiation, which is a much more specific task relating to the individual projects that
have been identified in the two-step strategic portfolio processes summarized above.
It follows that the task in the incubation/feasibility phase is to do whatever additional
work is required on each individual project to determine client/stakeholder needs,
and all the other processes described in detail in the previous article, many of which
are now summarized in Figure 5-5 below.
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 6 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
POSSIBILITIES FOR INCREASING “BUSINESS” SUCCESS BY INCREASING
PM INVOLVEMENT IN ORGANIZATIONAL STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
Possibilities for increasing PM involvement in organizational strategies
In the fourth article of this series I proposed a series of four steps for increasing
project management involvement in initiation processes for individual projects.
Having now made the above link between the latter and organizational strategic
portfolios and their component projects, I propose to extend these to increase the
involvement of project management in strategic processes, as shown in Figure 5-5.
(The strategic section of Figure 5-5 has been somewhat truncated to allow sufficient
space for all possibilities for increased PM involvement to be presented).
Strategic
Objectives
Develop
Strategic
Options
Evaluate.
Choose
Best
Strategic
Option
PM Involvement (5)
If all the preceding strategies,
particularly the directly strategy–related
ones, were successful, this would
enhance the chances of PMs being
promoted to senior GM positions, and
thence be able to contribute much more
strongly to strategy formulation and
objectives, developing strategic options,
and choosing the best.
Develop
Strategic
Portfolio
Programs
/Projects
Evaluate,
prioritise
/ balance
Programs
/Projects
These activities also
initiate the Incubation/
Feasibility Phase for
each individual project,
incl. initial determination
of needs, benefits,
requirements, & scope
Individ’l Project
Starting Phase
elaborating the
needs, benefits,
requirements,
scope, & thence
business case,
charter, etc
Individual Project Definition &
Planning Phase
PM Involvement (4++)
These initiation activities are
a natural extension of PM
PM Involv’t (3)
If (1) & (2)
happen, it
should be
easier to
persuade GM to
involve PMs in
elaborating
needs, benefits,
requirements,
project scope,
and
corresponding
feasibility
analyses.
PM Inv’t (2)
It should not
be too
difficult to
persuade
GM to have
PMs check
the
adequacy of
(or better still
develop) the
Project
Definition,
and the
related
feasibility
analyses
Evaluating, prioritizing and
balancing projects/programs
are also natural extensions
of PM, & strong arguments
can be advanced for
advocating PM involvement.
If this succeeds, It should
not then be too difficult to
convince GM that PMs are
better qualified than others
to develop programs and
projects from the chosen
strategic option.
Involves project definition, and
then progressively elaborating
this into detailed action plans
PM Inv’t (1)
Progressive
elaboration
of project
definition is
the natural
domain of
the PM. It
provides a
credible
base for
persuading
GM tp
involve PMs
more in
earlier
project work
Progressive increase of PM involvement in
strategic management processes would be facilitated by
progressive acquisition by PMs of strategic management
know- how and skills which are recognised
by senior GM, and are seen to complement their
contributions to strategic mgt processes
Figure 5-5: Apparent opportunities to increase project management involvement strategic mgt.
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 7 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
As can be seen, I have reproduced the major features of the proposed series of four
steps for increasing project management involvement in initiation processes for
individual projects in the lower right hand section of Figure 5-5. I have then added
what appear to be obvious opportunities to increase project management
involvement in the relevant strategic management activities.
Enhancing PM skills in strategic planning and management
The bottom block arrow of Figure 5-5 advocates a progressive acquisition by project
managers of strategic management know-how and skills, to help persuade general
management of the benefits of first involving project managers in strategic planning
processes, and then in more general aspects of strategic management.
As already noted, there have been a few papers in the project management literature
advocating increased project management involvement in strategic management,
including Usher 2014, 2013 and Stretton 2013l, 2013k. However, arguably the most
relevant I have come across recently is Naughton 2013, who discusses three major
skill sets that tomorrow’s project leader will need to possess (as described in 2012
by PMI’s President and CEO, Mark Langley) – namely Technical, Leadership and
Strategic skills, which he calls the Talent Triangle, as illustrated in Figure 5-6.
TECHNICAL
PROJECT
MANAGEMENT
STRATEGIC
& BUSINESS
MANAGEMENT
LEADERSHIP
Figure 5-6: The Talent Triangle – adapted from Naughton 2013
Naughton 2013 points out that this is strikingly similar to IPMA’s Eye of Competence
logo in its 2006 Competence Baseline, and goes on to observe that this similarity
….appears to represent some form of consensus on the profile of the future
project manager by the world’s two most respected professional organizations
IPMA and PMI.
So, it would appear likely that strategic and business management may well become
more prominent in project management educational agendas. As senior general
managers come to recognise that its project managers possess these additional
skills, they may be encouraged to look increasingly to project managers as being
part of their future senior general management talent pool.
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 8 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
RELATING OTHER CAUSES OF FAILURE WITH SUCCESS LEVEL 3
Lack of organisational support causes of failure
Lack of organizational
support causes
Lack of top mgt support (3)
Inadequate governance
Lack of training
Lack of PM focus
Lack of PM culture
Resource mgt. problems (2)
No leadership stability
All of the lack of organizational support causes of failure
identified in the second article of this series appear to be
relevant to Success Level 3. I can see no better way of
improving organisational support than by increasing
project
management
involvement
in
strategic
management processes, and particularly achieving
significant involvement at top general management
levels.
Other external causes of failure
Other external causes
of failure
Inflation
Adverse geophysical conditions
Unsupportive political
environment (2)
These other external causes of project failure are often
discussed in the literature in the context of overall risk
management.
Under appropriate circumstances any of these could be
relevant to “doing the right projects time after time”.
Project management leadership-related causes of failure
PM leadership-related
causes of failure
Relationships management
Lack of trust
Poor delegation
Lack of focus
Lack of commitment
No clear team objectives
The most relevant of these six causes of failure for Level
3 are undoubtedly relationships management and lack of
trust (if the latter reflects general management views on
project management, or vice versa). Clearly superior
skills in relationships management are the key to
persuading general management to involve project
management more intimately in strategic planning and
management activities, and resolving any issues of trust.
Project management operational causes of failure
These can, of course, strongly affect the project outputs and outcomes, and thence
the achievement of strategic objectives. However, discussion of these types of
causes in the context of individual projects has already been covered in the third
article of this series (Stretton 2015b).
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 9 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
In the project context, “business” success – i.e. “doing the right projects right, time
after time – has been directly related by several writers to the achievement of
organizational strategic objectives.
Mintzberg & Waters 1985 developed an eight-type categorization of organizational
strategies, ranging from wholly planned ‘deliberate’ strategies at one end, to wholly
imposed ‘emergent’ strategies at the other. Their research indicates that, in practice,
most strategies have components of both. However, it is reasonable to conclude that
all emergent strategies are eventually formalized, in the sense of becoming part and
parcel of the organization’s overall strategy.
We then looked at strategic planning processes, which lead to the development and
sorting of strategic portfolios of projects (and/or programs of projects). In the project
management literature in particular, these are seen as key elements in helping
achieve organizational strategic objectives.
I used to believe that ‘emergent’ projects, such as emergency projects, should be
seen as independent of strategic formulation and planning processes. However, the
above Mintzberg & Waters categorization of strategies has now led me to the
viewpoint that all projects can be seen as having their origins in organizational
strategies.
It therefore follows that if the strategic formulation and planning processes are not
“done right”, the chances are that one or more of the projects developed in these
processes will not be the right project(s) to help achieve the strategic objectives.
These strategic formulation and planning processes were then linked to the first
phase of project initiation developed in the previous article, where the case had been
made for increasing project management involvement in all project initiation phases.
The case was then made for extending such project management involvement into
the development and evaluation of the strategic portfolio of projects, and thence into
strategic formulation itself, as an approach for increasing “business” success.
It was concluded that a primary strategy for increasing Level 3 success rates
is to progressively increase project management involvement in
organisational strategic planning, and thence into strategic management.
Implementation of this strategy would be facilitated by enhancing project managers’
knowledge and skills in strategic and business management. Pushing the theme of
project managers’ skills and experience in progressive elaboration activities might
also help.
If these strategies were successful, the chances of project managers being promoted
to senior general management positions would be enhanced.
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 10 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
This, in turn, would greatly facilitate the process of securing some measure of
influence and control over causes of project failures which all too often have been
out of reach. It would also put project managers in an excellent position to help
overcome the other most relevant cause of failure, namely the ‘Lack of
organisational support’ cause.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Once again I have to thank my AIPM colleague Bill Young for his help in critiquing
earlier drafts of this series of articles, which has led to substantial improvements.
However, all deficiencies remain mine alone.
REFERENCES
ARCHER, Norm & Fereidoun GHASEMZADEH 2004. “Project Portfolio Selection and
Management”. In The Wiley Guide to Managing Projects, Eds Peter W G Morris & Jeffrey K
Pinto, Hoboken, NJ; John Wiley & Sons. Chapter 11, pp 237-255.
ARCHER, Norm & Fereidoun GHASEMZADEH 1999.”An Integrated Framework for Project
Portfolio Selection”. International Journal of Project Management, Vol 17, No 4, pp 207-216.
ARCHIBALD, Russell D 2009. “Five decades of modern project management: Where it
came from – Where it’s going”. PM World Today, Vol XI, Issue X, October.
ARCHIBALD, Russell D, Ivano Di Filippo & Daniele Di Fillipo (2012). The six-phase
comprehensive project life cycle model in the project incubation/feasibility phase and the
post-project evaluation phase. PM World Journal, Vol I, Issue V, December.
COOKE-DAVIES Terry (2004). Project success. In The Wiley Guide to Managing Projects,
Eds Peter W G Morris & Jeffrey K Pinto, Hoboken, NJ; John Wiley. Chapter 5, pp 99-122.
DALCHER, D (2014). Rethinking project success in software projects: Looking beyond the
failure factors. In Software Project Management in a Changing World, Eds G Ruhe & C
Wohlin, Berlin, Springer. Chapter 2, pp. 27-49.
MINTZBERG Henry & James A WATERS (1985). Of strategies, deliberate and emergent.
Strategic Management Journal, Vol 6, pp 257-272.
MORRIS, Peter W G (2013). Reconstructing Project Management. Chichester, West
Sussex; Wiley-Blackwell.
NAUGHTON, Ed (2013). IPMA education and training series: The iron triangle under threat!
PM World Journal, Vol II, Issue XII, December.
PMI (PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE) 2006a. “The Standard for Program
Management”. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 11 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
PMI (PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE) 2006b. “The Standard for Portfolio
Management”. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute
STRETTON Alan (2015c). Project Successes and Failures Series (4): Approaches to
increasing Level 2: “Project” success. PM World Journal, Vol IV, Issue III, March.
STRETTON Alan (2015b). Project Successes and Failures Series (3): Approaches to
increasing Level 1: “Project management” success. PM World Journal, Vol IV, Issue II,
February.
STRETTON Alan (2015a). Project Successes and Failures Series (2): Some deficiencies in
published causes of project failures. PM World Journal, Vol IV, Issue I, January.
STRETTON Alan (2014j). Project Successes and Failures Series (1): Some deficiencies in
data on project successes and failures. PM World Journal, Vol III, Issue XII, December.
STRETTON Alan (2013l). Further notes on involving program/project managers in
organisational strategic planning. PM World Journal, Vol II, Issue X, October.
STRETTON Alan (2013k). Involving program/project managers in organisational strategic
planning? PM World Journal, Vol II, Issue X, October.
TURNER, J Rodney 1993. The Handbook of Project-Based Management. London, McGrawHill.
USHER Greg (2014). Enhancing strategic integrity through project managerment. PM World
Journal, Vol III, Issue III, March.
USHER, Greg (2013). Inviting project managers into the boardroom. PM World Journal, Vol
II, Issue IX, September.
Van Den BROECKE Erik 2005. “Realising strategy in turbulent environments: A role for
programme and portfolio management”. ESC Lille, 5th International Project and Programme
Management Workshop, August.
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 12 of 13
PM World Journal
Vol. IV, Issue IV – April 2015
Approaches to increasing Level 3: “Business” success
Project Success and Failure Series no 5
www.pmworldjournal.net
Series Article
1
by Alan Stretton
About the Author
Alan Stretton, PhD
Faculty Corps, University of Management
and Technology, Arlington, VA (USA)
Life Fellow, AIPM (Australia)
Alan Stretton is one of the pioneers of modern project
management. He is currently a member of the Faculty Corps for the University of
Management & Technology (UMT), USA. In 2006 he retired from a position as
Adjunct Professor of Project Management in the Faculty of Design, Architecture and
Building at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), Australia, which he joined in
1988 to develop and deliver a Master of Project Management program. Prior to
joining UTS, Mr. Stretton worked in the building and construction industries in
Australia, New Zealand and the USA for some 38 years, which included the project
management of construction, R&D, introduction of information and control systems,
internal management education programs and organizational change projects. He
has degrees in Civil Engineering (BE, Tasmania) and Mathematics (MA, Oxford),
and an honorary PhD in strategy, programme and project management (ESC, Lille,
France). Alan was Chairman of the Standards (PMBOK) Committee of the Project
Management Institute (PMI®) from late 1989 to early 1992. He held a similar
position with the Australian Institute of Project Management (AIPM), and was elected
a Life Fellow of AIPM in 1996. He was a member of the Core Working Group in the
development of the Australian National Competency Standards for Project
Management. He has published over 140 professional articles and papers. Alan
can be contacted at alanailene@bigpond.com.au.
To see more works by Alan Stretton, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at
http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/alan-stretton/.
© 2015 Alan Stretton
www.pmworldlibrary.net
Page 13 of 13